AW: [ RadSafe ] Re: Risks and Realities: The "New Nuclear EnergyRevival"

Franz Schönhofer franz.schoenhofer at
Tue May 8 15:40:18 CDT 2007


I respectfully disagree.....

For Europe I know for sure, but I know that this is also valid for other
parts of the world, including the USA: As soon as there is any plan known
for constructing any power plant (hydroelectric, coal fired, gas fired, etc)
our green friends stand up and explain, why this plan cannot be executed,
why it will ruin the environment, the social context of the area,
bla,bla,bla...... Then politicians will stand up, fearing to lose a few
hundred votes in the next election and declare that they never have
supported those plans and will never do it, bla,bla,bla and then all plans
will be cancelled, all the money already invested in planning will be
written off etc. etc.

Believe me, non-nuclear power generation has not the slightest financial
advantage over nuclear one!

Food for thought.

Best regards,


Franz Schoenhofer, PhD
MinRat i.R.
Habicherg. 31/7
A-1160 Wien/Vienna

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Muckerheide, Jim (CDA) [mailto:Jim.Muckerheide at] 
Gesendet: Dienstag, 08. Mai 2007 21:22
An: John Jacobus; howard long; HotGreenChile at; Jerry Cohen; Franz
"Schönhofer; Otto G. Raabe; Dukelow, James S Jr; Kai Kaletsch; Radsafe
Cc: Dan McCarn
Betreff: RE: [ RadSafe ] Re: Risks and Realities: The "New Nuclear


"Less than half."

Regards, Jim 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: radsafe-bounces at 
>[mailto:radsafe-bounces at] On Behalf Of John Jacobus
>Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 2:42 PM
>To: howard long; HotGreenChile at; 'Jerry Cohen'; 
>'Franz "Schönhofer'; 'Otto G. Raabe'; 'Dukelow, James S Jr'; 
>'Kai Kaletsch'; 'Radsafe'
>Cc: 'Dan McCarn'
>Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Re: Risks and Realities: The "New 
>Nuclear EnergyRevival"
>And what are the costs for non-nuclear power sources,
>such as coal plants, dams, etc.?  
>--- howard long <hflong at> wrote:
>> Ted Rockwell points out in his book, Creating the
>> New World, 
>>   Stories and Images from the Dawn of the Atomic
>> Age, foreword by Glenn Seaborg,
>>    that half of the cost of nuclear power plants
>> actually goes to lawyers and bankers, 
>>   through obstructive regulation lobbied by
>> antinucs. 
>>   Fig 8.3 Growth in cost of nuclear power plants and
>> growth in number of regulatory documents.
>>   Fig 8.4 Growth in required nuclear plant
>> documentation
>>   So, "-the bottom line of the financial balance
>> sheet." (below) requires only deregulation (as with
>> the cost of health care). In both, the burdensome
>> regulation does not help public safety, but only
>> perpetuates parasitic salaries. 
>>   Point this out on electricity bills!
>>   Howard Long   
>> Dan W McCarn <hotgreenchile at> wrote:
>>         st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }      
>>          Hi - There is a new article in Arms Control
>> Today (May 2007) about issues and problems with the
>> development of nuclear power.  Only the first three
>> paragraphs are cited below.  As I mentioned in an
>> earlier posting, the issues related to CO2 emissions
>> are not just the possibility of climate change or
>> the politics but the reality that the economics of
>> CO2 are pushing the major energy companies to
>> seriously consider the bottom line on the financial
>> balance sheet.  The majors are turning to methods of
>> minimizing CO2 emissions whether through
>> sequestration, improved energy efficiency, or
>> alternate energy.  Since I work for one of the
>> "majors", I know that the orders have gone down to
>> seriously consider development impact with regards
>> CO2 in every sector of the business.
>>   So Jerry, it's not just hysteria.  This is
>> business and the focus is on the bottom line of the
>> financial balance sheet!
>>   Dan W McCarn, Geologist
>>   Albuquerque & Houston
>What are the facts? Again and again and again - what are the 
>facts? Shun wishful thinking,. . . avoid opinion, [and] care 
>not what the neighbors think, . . .what are the facts, and to 
>how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown 
>future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!" 
> "Time Enough for Love," Robert Heinlein, 1973
>-- John
>John Jacobus, MS
>Certified Health Physicist
>e-mail:  crispy_bird at
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
>You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and 
>understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: 
>For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other 
>settings visit:

More information about the RadSafe mailing list